Comments about ‘Letters: News bias’

There may actually be some merit to the claims made in this letter. A quick
Google search only produced 2400+ responses for the egregious error of the
president mispronouncing a word. But the relatively mild case of an assistant
attorney general being accused of illegally helping someone buy political
influence and taking a healthy fee for doing so in the process produced over 8
million responses. I mean, as the author points out, Mr. Swallow’s
alleged infractions of the law is something that’s done every day by
politicians everywhere. Surely we can forgive him.

But now
mispronouncing a word – three times no less – is just unforgiveable.
Off with his head! In case you’re wondering, this is meant as
sarcasm.

And for the record, there over 38 million responses to the
Benghazi attack and the president’s accountability, which seems hardly
like a “minimization” of the issue. In the 8 years prior to the
current administration over 60 Americans died in 16 separate attacks at
embassies around the world. I wonder if Mr. Huck complained about the coverage
of those, or even knew about them.

First, can you outline
who is (or who is not) the Liberal media? That would give us a starting
point.

As far as the "The massive news coverage of John
Swallow's alleged improprieties" do you mean in Utah? I have seen
zero national news coverage. It is certainly covered in the DN. Do you think
the DN is liberal?

Ah, Benghazi. Do me a favor. Use your
imagination and lay out what the big scandal is. I can concur that
mistakes were made and things could have been done differently, but I am unclear
on what the big "smoking gun" is here. Serious question. Lay out the
scandal for me.

Next

"Obama's "corpse"
men speech vs Marco Rubio's drink of water.

That's your
evidence of "liberal media"? Maybe Rubio's quick drink just made
for better TV. Regardless, both made me laugh and didn't change my opinion
of either men. Both decent guys.

Lastly, How did you know that the
New York Times gave "39 days of front page coverage to the Abu Ghraib
prisoner humiliation "

Every time we get into this same trope about liberal and conservative media, I
wonder if the writers are aware that those conversations are being made quaint
by the blogosphere? Rubio's thirst was tweeted to the world before the
first newscast mentioned it. Rubio himself tweeted it in a photo. I fear once
again that those of us past a "certain" age are showing a lack of
awareness of what constitutes "media" these days. The "media"
now reports on the blogosphere as if it is news.

That's what wrong here, we are more focused on what divides us than what
really unites us.

Most every American wants the same things: They want to be able to make enough to survive and provide for their familyThey want to live their life as they see fit.

Where we disagree is
how to best accomplish those, it's really a matter of degrees and not
diametrically opposed views.

Now for the letter:Mr. Swallow
really doesn't have much to defend, nor produced a defense. The whole
defense is "let the investigation finish" that really amounts to one
article. However, the media is constantly finding out more about what allegedly
happened, and each one of those turns into a news article.

Republican, or Democrat, Attorney General needs to have the utmost ethical
integrity. Asking someone that they are positive there is no paper trail of
something is the opposite of ethics (my ethical guideline generally has been,
how would I feel if this made the front page of the paper). Turning it into an
R vs D only makes the matter worse.

Political corruption is a serious offense and should be investigated and exposed
whether it is practiced by a Democrat or a Republican, conservative or
liberal.

Unfortunately, there is a huge double standard by a ton of
political hacks out there. I see it every day on these forumns. Nowhere is it
more obvious than in the press which is overwhelmingly liberal.

"Your guy did something wrong - lets all shout it from the rooftops, our
guy did something wrong - nothing to see here" is written into every story
(or implied when a story is ignored).

I am conservative and it pains
me when a prominent Republican does something wrong, but if he/she lies, cheats
on their taxes, sleeps with a teenager, or gets caught with a DUI then hang them
out to dry, conservative or not!

I almost never hear such things from
liberals about bad Democrats. Instead it is "circle the wagons", endless
excuses, and blame the GOP somehow for the bad behaviour.

Re: ". . . we are more focused on what divides us than what really unites
us."

You're talking about liberals, of course.

Liberals have a long, LONG history of not being able to take "yes" for
an answer. They loudly demand "compromise," then, when given, it's
never enough, and their "compromise" partners become the objects of
disingenuous liberal criticism, even derision, for whatever "crisis"
they dream up as resulting from the compromise they demanded. When things go
wrong, liberals revert quickly to the blame game, asserting that only their
compromise "partners" are to blame, accepting none, themselves.

North Carolina liberals recently publicly admitted the true aim of all
liberals -- eviscerate any opposition, control every decision, win by increasing
individual dependency on politics, and dodge blame for any mistake.

It's all kinda juvenile, of course, but it's been the left's
primary strategy since they abandoned all pretense of fealty to the truth, back
in the '30s.

The primary issue now dividing us and preventing
unity is well-placed mistrust of disingenuous liberals.

"Liberals" in the media are far more
critical of liberals than conservatives are of their own. How many conservative
media types have lost their jobs? Conservative guests on programs often exceed
liberal guests.

Furthermore:What is the No. 1 newspaper in
America by circulation? Why, that would be The Wall Street Journal, a bastion of
conservative values on its editorial pages.

What about radio?
Conservative proframs dominate. In cable television, Fox News continues to top
the competition.

Naturally, there are individuals, news
organizations, and forms of media that are not liberal. There are also a fair
number of "far-right" organizations out there.

But in poll
after poll the results are always the same. The vast majority of people in the
news business (journalists, editors, publishers, etc.) self identify themselves
as liberal, vote Democratic, and financially support liberal causes. In many
polls, the ratio was more than 4 to 1 (liberals to conservatives).

The slant left in that industry is almost as bad as it is in Hollywood (and
that is saying a lot).